The Age ran some items on Melbourne's variable and often low metropolitan off-peak rail frequencies last week. Including a front page story last Thursday and a supportive editorial on Friday. These showed how some of the network's busiest suburban stations had the longest waits. The Age found a particular difference between stations in Melbourne's north and west (eg Essendon and Sunshine) and those in the south and east (particularly on the Frankston line) with the latter often enjoying half the waits.
The quoted DoT/DTP claim that service levels reflected line (not station) patronage wasn't convincing. Especially after you see station usage plotted on a network map (with maximum wait annotations here).
The quoted DoT/DTP claim that service levels reflected line (not station) patronage wasn't convincing. Especially after you see station usage plotted on a network map (with maximum wait annotations here).
There's other comparisons you can make. For example against world cities we like to compare ourselves with and Sydney. Both examples put us in a bad light, with other places having two to three times the rail frequencies we do, especially at night.
How did Melbourne get to this point? The post WWII pattern of suburbanisation, mass car ownership and television led to inner suburbs hollowing out, patronage profiles becoming more 'peaky' and service kilometres spread more thinly. Outer areas sometimes got rail electrification extensions and service gains but the latter often came from inner area frequency cuts.
Later the story has been more of service stagnation as successive transport leaders concentrated instead on distractions (eg ticketing, franchising, branding, flexible route buses, internal restructurings) or infrastructure (often desirable but not necessary for 'quick win' off-peak service gains).
These circumstances do not explain why cities such as Perth, with all the same pressures (if not more) was able to revamp its rail network such that no one can seriously claim it was better 85 years ago than today on key grounds including coverage and frequency. Unfortunately, despite significant activity, no such unqualified claim can be made for metropolitan Melbourne trains, especially with regards to service levels (unlike regional trains to major centres like Geelong and Bendigo which are vastly more frequent now, partly at the expense of minor and branch line closures).
These circumstances do not explain why cities such as Perth, with all the same pressures (if not more) was able to revamp its rail network such that no one can seriously claim it was better 85 years ago than today on key grounds including coverage and frequency. Unfortunately, despite significant activity, no such unqualified claim can be made for metropolitan Melbourne trains, especially with regards to service levels (unlike regional trains to major centres like Geelong and Bendigo which are vastly more frequent now, partly at the expense of minor and branch line closures).
People, even some who should know better, sometimes come up with excuses for Melbourne's often low off-peak rail frequencies. As well as looking at comparable cities we can study Melbourne's own history of running frequent trains. Has a whole culture of all week day and night frequent service on our trains been forgotten? Keep reading!
Four years ago I compared 2019 evening frequencies with those from 1975. There were fewer kilometres of electrified track and more shortworkings than now. However evening service was generally better on most lines with 20 minute intervals about as widespread as the 30 minutes gaps today. This is despite Melbourne being about half today's size and more rigid 5 or 5 1/2 day week working and shopping patterns. Daytime service frequencies weren't that special though as many cuts had already been made by then. Hence we need to look back further to see if there was a time when we ran more comprehensive frequent service (say every 15 minutes or better) all day.
Four years ago I compared 2019 evening frequencies with those from 1975. There were fewer kilometres of electrified track and more shortworkings than now. However evening service was generally better on most lines with 20 minute intervals about as widespread as the 30 minutes gaps today. This is despite Melbourne being about half today's size and more rigid 5 or 5 1/2 day week working and shopping patterns. Daytime service frequencies weren't that special though as many cuts had already been made by then. Hence we need to look back further to see if there was a time when we ran more comprehensive frequent service (say every 15 minutes or better) all day.
1939's frequent rail network
Let's go back to 1939. We had haltingly emerged from the Great Depression and were about to enter WWII. Melbourne's population was barely 1 million. The service comparison job is easy thanks to the 1939 Victorian Railways timetable being online.
From that I plotted the frequent service on a map. Thick lines are every 15 minutes all day until late at night while thinner lines were every 20 or 30 minutes. Some lines went further at lower frequencies (eg hour or more gaps) but I left those out. Where these have survived these portions are more frequent now due to suburban expansion. Conversely some corridors are very thick due to multiple lines giving high frequency (eg rarely more than 10 min gaps for Caulfield until almost midnight).
Melbourne was smaller and poorer in 1939 than today. However frequent day and night service was available in eight main directions from Melbourne. Passengers rarely needed to wait more than 15 minutes for a train at over 70 stations, even at night. Trams ran more frequently too.
What about Sundays? These had less service but 20 minute afternoon service was not atypical on the main sections. That's not unlike today on most lines. Sunday mornings were far less frequent, a feature that remains in many of today's timetables (though not as much).
What about Sundays? These had less service but 20 minute afternoon service was not atypical on the main sections. That's not unlike today on most lines. Sunday mornings were far less frequent, a feature that remains in many of today's timetables (though not as much).
Higher frequency meant shorter waits if transferring. Not that changing was always necessary for cross-city journeys; in some cases you could stay on the one through-CBD train with details marked in printed timetables. The later fashion of operating everything via the grand and topologically unsound City Loop (but not the more modest but better 1929 underground proposal) regrettably removed that ability. However sense started returning when we routed Frankston trains to Newport (sold as a way to improve reliability and free capacity for Dandenong trains both of which it did) and more recently in the through-city design we chose for the Metro Tunnel.
As you saw above the frequent rail service was quite evenly distributed in 1939. It was available as much in the north and west as in the south and east. But when train frequencies got partly restored from the 1990s (firstly Sandringham, then Dandenong and Frankston) and 2010s (including weekends for Ringwood, Dandenong and Frankston) the main gains were in the south and the east. Some stations that didn't before have it gained frequent service while others that had it before (especially in safe Labor areas) remained without despite their high usage.
The result is today's lopsided pattern (below) and the experience at popular stations like Essendon, Coburg, Reservoir and Heidelberg where waits for off-peak trains remain longer than they were over 80 years ago.
As the above is only about daytime service (albeit with Sundays added) it isn't really comparable to the 1939 map which included nights. When those are counted the frequent service almost entirely disappears, collapsing from over 70 suburban stations in 1939 to less than ten today (see below). .
Today no single suburban rail line in Melbourne operates every 15 minutes or better at night (though four now come close at every 20 minutes). Thus the only way to have frequent service is to be on multiple lines that have been evenly scheduled, such as out to Clifton Hill.
2023 versus 1939 maximum waits
A while ago I said that we waited about twice as long as our grandparents did for trams due to lower frequencies, especially at night. Is this also true for trains at 1939 frequent network rail termini like Essendon, Coburg and Reservoir? And are there places like Sunshine and East Malvern that had significant (but not frequent) train service that we should also be looking at?
It turns out that the double wait applies to trains too. Especially in Melbourne's north, where maximum waits have gone from 15 to 30 minutes. Williamstown would also have been on that list if it wasn't for the 2021 service boost that increased evening trains from every 30 to every 20 minutes. That's still worse than in 1939 but means that today's service is only 25% lower (from 4 to 3 trains per hour) with gaps up 33% (from 15 to 20 min).
Caulfield was harder to quantify. It has trains to Dandenong and Frankston operating at uneven frequencies with different stopping patterns. I used the Frankston line as a 2023 reference, comparing its 3 trains per hour with the 6 trains per hour (with a few uneven gaps) in 1939 to arrive at a 100% increase in the maximum wait. Maybe that's slightly unfair, though if you are designing for network legibility maximum waits for each unique stopping pattern is the correct measure to use.
Sunshine, Alamein and East Malvern didn't have a frequent evening service in 1939 but they're included here. I've rated the first two as slightly improved as today's timetable lacks the uneven gaps of 1939's even though basic frequency for both has remained at about 30 minutes. East Malvern however has less service today with gaps increasing from 20 to the post-1978 usual 30 minutes.
Precincts like Box Hill and Moonee Ponds are the sorts of places where we're building density yet haven't always added significant frequent 7 day and night train service. This is essential for the viability of these places as centres and to support the low car lifestyles necessary to enjoy reasonable amenity without congestion.
Also the rail network can no longer rely on CBD peak passengers to retain and increase its role. Instead it needs to look to other passenger markets (that need good all day frequency) to retain its relevance.
More on improving Melbourne's train frequency here, here and here.
Also the rail network can no longer rely on CBD peak passengers to retain and increase its role. Instead it needs to look to other passenger markets (that need good all day frequency) to retain its relevance.
More on improving Melbourne's train frequency here, here and here.
2 comments:
Not a good analysis at all really. Compare the population along the entire length of the Frankston and Dandenong lines with that (and usuage) to Williamstown. Listing Caulfield as every 10 mins without acknowledging that it is a junction for the Dandenong and Frankston lines and that EACH has a 20 min service. Then comparing that to an end of line station like Williamstown instead of it's junction station of Newport, which has every 10 mins.
This article doesn't mention Footscray that scored highest on passenger numbers but previous articles on THAT failed to pick up WHY Footscray had such high numbers. Two reasons really. Firstly it's an interchange station but like no other interchange station on the network you have to swipe your Myki card to change platforms at Footscray so every CHANGE is recorded as a passenger. AND with lots of work on the new Metrail Tunnel at South Kensington there have been frequent nights of buses beyond Footscray so everybody heading West has terminated there and swiped to get out of the station. Very skewed figures.
As for THIS report overall maybe in 1939 nobody cared or hard calculated profit and loss at that time. I imagine services were reduced on lines that didn't carry the number of people others did in the same way some country lines were closed. Overall a poor analysis with only half the information.
Unknown. You're over-thinking things. 70 suburban stations had frequent day and night service in 1939. Fewer than 10 do now. Yet the line capacity and rolling stock exists to do a lot better. And many station precincts are attracting denser development. There's no reason why we shouldn't have the more frequent all day service that other cities take for granted.
Post a Comment